Remote monitoring in principle and in practice

The potential of remote monitoring and machine learning to enhance performance in the mining industry is exciting, with promises of impressive time and cost savings. However, practical implementation of such technology often reveals a more complex picture. While remote monitoring systems can address significant challenges for production managers and maintenance teams, they can also introduce new issues. Based on real-world experience, this article provides a candid exploration of the benefits and the unintended consequences of adopting advanced technologies in bulk materials handling.

Over the past 10 years, remote monitoring solutions that use sensors to provide data on the condition and performance of wear parts without maintenance teams having to physically go to the equipment to inspect it in person have been developed.

There are several benefits to this approach. Traditional inspection regimes not only introduce unnecessary operating costs but also needless exposure to safety risks. That is why remote monitoring is especially effective, particularly in the following cases:

• Equipment is so far away that inspection time is a fraction of the time to get there.

• Inspection involves complex procedures and supervision to organize safe access.

• The operation needs to shut down just to inspect one area or piece of equipment.

• Inspecting every conveyor takes days but no maintenance is needed.

The challenge of preventive maintenance

The drive for production in the short-term makes it more likely that preventive maintenance inspections go to the bottom of the “to do” list, and maintenance only becomes a priority when there is a problem that needs fixing. Short-term targets frequently mean that systems “run to failure” rather than being run to maximize long-term, cost-effective productivity.

Components like belt cleaners, which may not be seen as critical to productivity compared with other parts of the operation, are among the first to be overlooked. That means maintenance technicians are often called upon to react to a problem rather than prevent one. Ignoring maintenance for too long is known to result in higher costs and more downtime in the long-term.

Remote monitoring systems not only reduce labour but also limit unsafe behaviours such as taking shortcuts to access equipment to save time, ignoring inspection schedules and risk assessments, or engaging in quick fixes with inadequate tools and access, rather than planning safe maintenance during designated downtime.

By using cloud-based technology, operators can do real-time, condition-based monitoring and preventive maintenance of components like belt cleaners or air cannons. The data collected from sensors can help to predict when servicing may be required, giving operators enough time to arrange an inspection, order the required parts, and book contractors to carry out maintenance during scheduled downtime.

The development of viable remote monitoring

Martin Engineering’s Center for Innovation, located at its headquarters in Neponset, Ill., designed and developed the first N2 Position Indicator (PI) for monitoring polyurethane conveyor belt cleaners (the first of many sensors compatible in the Martin OnSite infrastructure or ecosystem or platform). With the goal of making the device affordable, accessible, reliable and easy to install, the conveyor belt cleaners’ performance and condition information is transmitted via a central “gateway” to the cloud. Data is then clearly presented and easily accessed via a dedicated mobile app or desktop platform.

This technology is the ideal solution for drastically cutting down on inspection time, and the more difficult and time-consuming the belt cleaners are to inspect, the greater the potential for time saving. Essentially, if you know the condition of a belt cleaner blade by using the app, there is no need to go and visually inspect it. Live installations show that such devices can reduce inspection time by as much as 90%, which also means reduced exposure to the safety risks associated with accessing conveyors. Additionally, remote monitoring eliminates the guesswork around belt cleaner servicing — the condition of the blade is based on data-driven facts rather than human observation and perception. That opens the prospect of true preventive maintenance and, over time, predictive maintenance.

As a result, since the introduction of the N2 PI, there are now thousands of units installed at more than 40 mineral processing operations worldwide. Crucially, this has provided invaluable insight not only into the performance of the belt cleaners in keeping conveyors clean, but also some of the issues associated with remote monitoring systems. One major lesson, for example, was that remote monitoring of wear parts might not be the right solution for some operators. And just like the personal “smart tech” many people use at home every day, remote monitoring can also be the source of some frustrations. Working closely with customers, engineers identified the following four key areas to consider with the implementation of a remote monitoring system:

1) Does it address your pain points?

Pain points are the everyday problems that cause hassle, create risk, slow productivity, waste time, and cost money. Our core mission of “cleaner, safer, and more productive” operations is intended to address those pain points, driving the design and engineering of its extensive catalog of products, including the N2 PI.

During the company’s initial research, it was clear that many tech solutions falter because they do not address real pain points. In other cases, developers fail to clearly explain to operators how their innovative solution addresses their problems. And perhaps worst of all are those examples where technology introduces new pain points that were overlooked during development and testing.

It is vital to identify key performance indicators (KPIs) to ensure the right pain points are being addressed. Unique to each mine and mine operator, KPIs must focus on specific production efficiencies and potential operational discrepancies between individual belt conveyors.

For example, N2 PI system is designed to show if there is a problem with a belt cleaner blade on each conveyor. For some maintenance managers, that is useful data that triggers prompt action. For others, it is just another notification about another task on an already too long list of jobs (one that they are not going to get round to anytime soon). So, remote monitoring is only useful if a team has the bandwidth to keep up.

In one site where belt cleaners were relatively accessible, and the production team continually conducted regular walk-rounds of the whole operation, remote monitoring was not valued to the same extent as a site where physical visits to each conveyor are rare.

2) Does it deliver useful, actionable data?

In a major bulk handling operation, there is a risk that remote monitoring solutions may lead to data overload. All of us are already inundated with information from innumerable sources, and additional data coming from remote monitoring systems competes with endless messages and notifications. Yet it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that having access to lots more data is where the value lies, rather than the decisions and actions to be taken based on that information.

No matter how impressive any technology may be, or how interesting remote monitoring metrics may be, data collection alone does not achieve better productivity. The information therefore needs to be helpful, accurate, and presented concisely that helps decision-making. Equally, having the wrong KPIs can switch focus away from the desired outcome and skew decision making in a way that is ultimately detrimental to productivity.

3) Are you willing and able to change?

One of the biggest barriers to tech advancement is the difficulty or unwillingness to change. This comes in two main forms: business processes and people. Firstly, long-established business processes that are rigid can be responsible for engendering ways of working that become ingrained over decades. Secondly, people are often resistant to change in their daily routines,
regardless of inefficiency or safety: “we have always done it this way” is a popular mantra, especially in traditional industries.

So, introducing any technology requires change management. The installation and integration of the system must ensure the benefits of the change are well-anticipated and understood by all stakeholders, and new workflows need to be less onerous than the existing regime. Further, workers in mining operations often push back against new technology, believing that it could make their jobs redundant. This is not wholly unfounded, after all, because on a large-scale mining operation, the use of N2 PIs could replace what a typical maintenance technician does for up to a day each week.

In some cases, maintenance contractors who are not made aware that sensors are fitted, or are not trained on how they function, have failed to reset them correctly, with negative consequences for monitoring. Elsewhere there has been deliberate tampering of monitoring devices, and in one case, the workers believed the new tech installations would be used to “spy” on their behaviour, damaging workforce morale.

So, like all new systems, those involved must be prepared and trained in the right way, including explaining the rationale for installing remote monitoring systems, as well as reassuring motives.

4) Does it integrate with existing systems?

Successful technology must be designed to be retrofitted without any other upgrades to the whole system. Even better if, like with N2 PI, it is also scalable across operations of all sizes, types, and ages without incurring additional cost.

If an operation already has centralized monitoring for other components, it is important that data from new devices can integrate with existing systems although additional work to ensure compatibility is likely.

Besides integration with existing IT, which itself needs to be as seamless as possible, introducing new tech devices often means addressing physical obstacles too. That ranges from difficult access and limited space to legacy equipment and structures that may need moving or refabricating.

“Listening to understand” is the key to success

After spending around five years developing its first remote system for conveyor belt cleaners, N2 was launched in 2020. Working hand-in-glove with customers’ production and maintenance teams, service technicians resolved early teething problems and reported technical issues to the central development team who have continued to adapt the system accordingly. As a result, further N2 conveyor products sensors were developed to work with the same Gateway and is expected to launch a game-changing new flow aid sensor in the coming months.

As with all things in life, a balanced perspective is required when embracing technological advancement. Remote monitoring can be a route to help mining companies to accomplish safety and efficiency goals, but to decide whether it is the right solution for a particular mine depends on effective consultation with operators, detailed inspection of the production plant, and a well-planned and phased integration of the new system.

And to agree with a realistic sense of productivity improvement, it is imperative to understand the potential pitfalls that accompany change. Most importantly, having the right conversations, listening to understand the true pain points, embracing the challenges, and working together are critical to transforming this huge technological opportunity into action and results. 

Robert Whetstone is area vice-president, EMEAI Region, at Martin Engineering.

---